Hacker News Reader

Comment by kmarc | Hacker News Reader

If, in 2024, this fools a parent, then I'd rather be concerned about other aspects of their parenting, too...

During my long travels, where I meet (mostly wealthy-enough-to-travel) people I see this often: kids are sugar shocked in the early morning (fruit juice, jelly, breakfast-is-the-most-important-nonsense-cereals, snacks at 10AM, etc) and then by noon their parents are exhausted due to trying to handle the kids' hyperactivity. All I can think is that at least these kids' response is to burn those calories, and avoid being obese later (hopefully).

And not only kids. I don't know what exactly is going on in the US/Canada, but my observation is that they MUST chew every one or two hours; force feeding (comforting?) themselves. This behavior, the obsessive snacking, I never see from European / Asian travelers.

View on HN

Just because this is such a pervasive idea. Is it actually true that sugar correlates to any kind of hyperactivity? In the past I have seen studies concluding no correlation between sugar intake and energy. Also anecdotally, a few teaspoons of sugar has never given me the ability to run faster, or a little bit longer. It’s never made me become more active or wired. If it did, I’d be more prone to strategically use it to “gain an edge”.

That is to say, I’m even a victim of joking about this with other parents. But I do because I felt that it is a pervasive “truth” and I encounter no human that is willing to entertain the contrary. To the same extent, I’ve also never witnessed any adult sneak a tablespoon of sugar to get that hyperactivity boost.

Fat is also more calorically dense than gasoline. But I’ve also never seen someone bounce off the walls after consumption.

> To the same extent, I’ve also never witnessed any adult sneak a tablespoon of sugar to get that hyperactivity boost.

Cyclists and runners take sugar to gain an edge.

Fat is more calorically dense but the energy pathway is slower than sugar.

I think it's safe to keep joking about, it's probably one of the more accurate nutrition "facts".

You can see it in Europe too, albeit less so. We're catching up in terms of obesity too.

Kids do eat a lot because they're growing but if you start feeding them meat (fat particularly) they will feel full earlier and stop munching sugar (fruit included) every 30m.

I eat once a day on a carnivore diet and I don't experience hunger.

The grain industry really brainwashed everyone.

> The grain industry really brainwashed everyone

Pretty sure pre industrial agricultural groups had a higher average grain to meat ratio than today though? I think grain just scales better than animals.

The real issue isn't grains imo, it's grains that had all the fibre removed.

White bread is terrible for you. Brown bread is good for you, good for cholesterol(due to soluble fiber), has a low glycemic index(due to insoluble fiber), and has much more protein, vitamins and minerals than white bread.

I honestly believe white flour is much more responsible for lifestyle related health issues in the US than anything else.

Turns out, stripping the nutrients out of your food is bad.

Just careful with how "brown" it is. I saw stores selling sliced brown bread that differ from white bread only due food coloring. FWIW the packaging doesn't state it's more fibrous or healthier...

This is, I guess, the same trap people walk into, as with the "100% natural" (therefore assumably healthier) juices.

That's revolting. I live in Norway, I don't think that exists here. Bread is well marked with the percentage of grain thats's whole.

You yourself are falling for the exact same trap you are chastising other parents for. Sugar intake has nothing to do with hyperactivity.

Possibly. By hyperactivity I didn't mean the chronic medical (psychological?) condition, but the temporary boost that individuals experience upon glucose intake.

Nevertheless, I will still think that it's stupid to pump your kid with refined sugar worth of hundreds of calories by noon.

I was also meaning the temporary boost in activity. It just doesn't exist. You can take glucose to restore energy. But it won't make you more active. No one is taking glucose for an activity boost, else you would be seeing droves of people ditching coffee for dextose energy. But no one does that because it just doesn't work like that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com